The semantics of type variable matching isn't precisely specified

[mwiebe]

In our docs, we've referred to a datashape like A * A * int32 as a square matrix, but if A is permitted to match the var dimension, this is actually a ragged array.

Since 3 * int32 is syntactic sugar for fixed[3] * int32, we can specify a square matrix as the more wordy fixed[N] * fixed[N] * int32. (Note that the pattern matching implementation does not match type variables inside of type constructors presently though.).

[aterrel]

I always took it to mean A is var but all A's are the same dimension.

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Mark notifications@github.com wrote:

In our docs, we've referred to a datashape like A * A * int32 as a square
matrix, but if A is permitted to match the var dimension, this is
actually a ragged array.

Since 3 * int32 is syntactic sugar for fixed[3] * int32, we can specify a
square matrix as the more wordy fixed[N] * fixed[N] * int32. (Note that
the pattern matching implementation does not match type variables inside of
type constructors presently though.).

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/51
.